LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA, PETITIONER,
v.
JOHN ROBERT HARMON, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Leon County challenged a trial court's decision granting a defendant's motion to be declared partially indigent for costs despite being represented by private counsel paid by relatives. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the trial court properly interpreted Florida's indigency statutes and that allowing public funding for costs in such circumstances serves important policy interests.
A defendant may be declared partially indigent for costs even when represented by private counsel paid by relatives, and Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.220(o) is constitutional as a permissible implementation of procedures authorized by statute.
[1] A defendant represented by private counsel may be declared partially indigent for purposes of costs, including depositions, upon a showing of lack of funds or income, eve…
[2] Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.220(o) permissibly implements statutory procedures for the expenditure of public funds for indigent defendants.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A contrary conclusion would likely result in a lessened willingness and ability of relatives and friends, who might otherwise voluntarily do so, to retain private counsel for indigent adult defendants, ultimately increasing the workload of the already overburdened public defenders of this state.”
The court's policy rationale for affirming partial indigency determinations even when counsel is privately retained by relatives.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJohn Robert Harmon was charged with first degree murder and aggravated child abuse. Although represented by private counsel retained and paid by relat…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Petition For Writ Of Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Respondent John Robert Harmon has been charged with first degree murder and aggravated child abuse. Although represented by private counsel, he filed a motion in circuit court to be declared partially indigent for purposes of costs, including depositions. The motion was opposed by Leon County, which would be responsible for the costs if the motion were granted. At an evidentiary hearing, Harmon testified that he was essentially without funds or income and that the private counsel representing him was retained and being paid by relatives. This testimony was unrefuted, although the county did make legal argument in opposition to the motion. The motion was granted and the county now seeks review by petition for writ of certiorari in this court.
Petitioner first makes several arguments pertaining to the trial court’s construction of the applicable statutes, sections 27.52 and 939.07, Florida Statutes (1989). We find that these questions have been addressed and answered by our sister courts in Thompson v. State, 525 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), Guy v. State, 473 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985), Price v. Mounts, 421 So. 2d 690 (Fla, 4th DCA 1982), Saintil v. Snyder, 417 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), and Johnson v. Snyder, 417 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The Price and Snyder decisions were impliedly approved by this court in Behr v. Gardner, 442 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). To the extent any doubt may remain after Behr, we here expressly hold that we are in accord with the other districts on this issue.
Petitioner also makes an argument, apparently presented here for the first time to a Florida appellate court, that Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.220(o) is unconstitutional in allowing the courts to expend public funds, a function reserved to the legislature. We disagree, finding that the rule permissibly implements a procedure for the expenditure of funds authorized by statute.
We conclude by commenting that contrary to the position of petitioner, strong policy reasons support the result reached by the trial court. A contrary conclusion would likely result in a lessened willingness and ability of relatives and friends, who might otherwise voluntarily do so, to retain private counsel for indigent adult defendants, ultimately increasing the workload of the already overburdened public defenders of this state. We also note that section 939.07 provides adequate safeguards to prevent unwarranted expenditures.
PETITION DENIED.
JOANOS, C.J., and SHIVERS and ZEHMER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Orange Cnty. v. Williams, 702 So. 2d 1245 (Fla. 1997)…Administrative Commission; or 3) CCR. The first option is not a viable choice from a policy standpoint: attorneys will be unwilling to volunteer for post-conviction proceedings if they have to pay the litigation expenses. Cf. Leon County v. Harmon, 589 So. 2d 429 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991) (holding that private counsel representing capital defendant at trial should receive costs from the county), review denied, 595 So. 2d 557 (Fla.1992). The Attorney General argues that Williams’ litigation expenses should be paid…
Authorities Cited
- Behr v. Gardner, 442 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- Johnson v. The Honorable Arthur I. Snyder, 417 So. 2d 783 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Price v. The Honorable Marvin U. Mounts, Jr., 421 So. 2d 690 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)
- GUY v. State, 473 So. 2d 234 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985)
- Saintil v. The Honorable Arthur I. Snyder, 417 So. 2d 784 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Thompson v. State, 525 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)